Upgrading from 23 to 24
Hello, my upgrade attempt from Fedora 23 to Fedora 24 gave the folling error: # dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=24 RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free - Updates 453 kB/s | 185 kB 00:00 Adobe Systems Incorporated 10 kB/s | 1.8 kB 00:00 RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree - Updates340 kB/s | 95 kB 00:00 RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free 506 kB/s | 260 kB 00:00 RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree 248 kB/s | 62 kB 00:00 Error: cannot install both kernel-PAE-4.6.4-301.fc24.i686 and kernel-PAE-4.6.4-201.fc23.i686 (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages) Is it save to use the option '--allowerasing'? 4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE, which would be deleted is the current running kernel. When will the delete happen? Hopefully later with the "dnf system-upgrade reboot". Thanks in advance, Frank Elsner -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from 23 to 24
Den 2016-07-28 kl. 10:47, skrev Frank Elsner: > Hello, > > my upgrade attempt from Fedora 23 to Fedora 24 gave the folling error: > > # dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=24 > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free - Updates 453 kB/s | 185 kB 00:00 > > Adobe Systems Incorporated 10 kB/s | 1.8 kB 00:00 > > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree - Updates340 kB/s | 95 kB 00:00 > > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free 506 kB/s | 260 kB 00:00 > > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree 248 kB/s | 62 kB 00:00 > > Error: cannot install both kernel-PAE-4.6.4-301.fc24.i686 and > kernel-PAE-4.6.4-201.fc23.i686 > (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages) > > Is it save to use the option '--allowerasing'? > > 4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE, which would be deleted is the current running kernel. > When will the delete happen? Hopefully later with the "dnf system-upgrade > reboot". How many kernel is in /boot ? Check the contents of /etc/dnf/dnf.conf. The parameter "installonly_limit" is usually 3 just to guarantee that you don't delete the running kernel. Did you do "dnf update --refresh" before you started system upgrade? > > > Thanks in advance, > Frank Elsner > -- > users mailing list > users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org > -- Regards Jon Ingason -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from 23 to 24
I have a question to your request: Do you have in /etc/dnf/dnf.conf following line: installonly_limit=3 Did you made ``dnf upgrade --fresh`` before system-upgrade attempt? Do you run the newest kernel on your system? If some of the answers were no it could be a reason why you have the issue. If you will upgrade running kernel the replacement should take place during the reboot, therefore theoretically it should be save. On other hand any time when you perform the system-upgrade you have to consider a risk of malfunction of your upgraded system. Therefore back-up or snapshot could be handy. Jaroslav >Hello, > >my upgrade attempt from Fedora 23 to Fedora 24 gave the folling error: > >.# dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=24 >RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free - Updates 453 kB/s | 185 kB 00:00 >Adobe Systems Incorporated 10 kB/s | 1.8 kB 00:00 >RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree - Updates340 kB/s | 95 kB 00:00 >RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free 506 kB/s | 260 kB 00:00 >RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree 248 kB/s | 62 kB 00:00 >Error: cannot install both kernel-PAE-4.6.4-301.fc24.i686 and >kernel-PAE-4.6.4-201.fc23.i686 >(try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages) > >Is it save to use the option '--allowerasing'? > >4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE, which would be deleted is the current running kernel. >When will the delete happen? Hopefully later with the "dnf system-upgrade >reboot". > > Thanks in advance, Frank Elsner -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from 23 to 24
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 11:20:23 +0200 Jon Ingason wrote: > Den 2016-07-28 kl. 10:47, skrev Frank Elsner: > > Hello, > > > > my upgrade attempt from Fedora 23 to Fedora 24 gave the folling error: > > > > # dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=24 > > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free - Updates 453 kB/s | 185 kB 00:00 > > > > Adobe Systems Incorporated 10 kB/s | 1.8 kB 00:00 > > > > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree - Updates340 kB/s | 95 kB 00:00 > > > > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free 506 kB/s | 260 kB 00:00 > > > > RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree 248 kB/s | 62 kB 00:00 > > > > Error: cannot install both kernel-PAE-4.6.4-301.fc24.i686 and > > kernel-PAE-4.6.4-201.fc23.i686 > > (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting > > packages) > > > > Is it save to use the option '--allowerasing'? > > > > 4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE, which would be deleted is the current running > > kernel. > > When will the delete happen? Hopefully later with the "dnf system-upgrade > > reboot". > > How many kernel is in /boot ? # ls -1 /boot/vm* /boot/vmlinuz-0-rescue-3b68290512b34ff1a95c8473ec84025a /boot/vmlinuz-4.5.7-200.fc23.i686+PAE /boot/vmlinuz-4.5.7-202.fc23.i686+PAE /boot/vmlinuz-4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE # uname -r 4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE > Check the contents of /etc/dnf/dnf.conf. The parameter > "installonly_limit" is usually 3 just to guarantee that you don't delete > the running kernel. installonly_limit=3 > Did you do "dnf update --refresh" before you started system upgrade? Yes. --Frank Elsner -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from 23 to 24
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 05:57:57 -0400 (EDT) Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > I have a question to your request: > > Do you have in /etc/dnf/dnf.conf following line: > > installonly_limit=3 Yes. > Did you made ``dnf upgrade --fresh`` before system-upgrade attempt? Yes > Do you run the newest kernel on your system? Yes > If some of the answers were no it could be a reason why you have the issue. > > If you will upgrade running kernel the replacement should take place during > the reboot, therefore theoretically it should be save. Sounds good. > On other hand any time when you perform the system-upgrade you have to > consider a risk of malfunction of your upgraded system. Therefore back-up or > snapshot could be handy. Of course. --Frank Elsner -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from 23 to 24
Den 2016-07-28 kl. 12:09, skrev Frank Elsner: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 11:20:23 +0200 Jon Ingason wrote: >> Den 2016-07-28 kl. 10:47, skrev Frank Elsner: >>> Hello, >>> >>> my upgrade attempt from Fedora 23 to Fedora 24 gave the folling error: >>> >>> # dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=24 >>> RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free - Updates 453 kB/s | 185 kB 00:00 >>> >>> Adobe Systems Incorporated 10 kB/s | 1.8 kB 00:00 >>> >>> RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree - Updates340 kB/s | 95 kB 00:00 >>> >>> RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Free 506 kB/s | 260 kB 00:00 >>> >>> RPM Fusion for Fedora 24 - Nonfree 248 kB/s | 62 kB 00:00 >>> >>> Error: cannot install both kernel-PAE-4.6.4-301.fc24.i686 and >>> kernel-PAE-4.6.4-201.fc23.i686 >>> (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting >>> packages) >>> >>> Is it save to use the option '--allowerasing'? >>> >>> 4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE, which would be deleted is the current running >>> kernel. >>> When will the delete happen? Hopefully later with the "dnf system-upgrade >>> reboot". >> >> How many kernel is in /boot ? > > # ls -1 /boot/vm* > /boot/vmlinuz-0-rescue-3b68290512b34ff1a95c8473ec84025a > /boot/vmlinuz-4.5.7-200.fc23.i686+PAE > /boot/vmlinuz-4.5.7-202.fc23.i686+PAE > /boot/vmlinuz-4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE > > # uname -r > 4.6.4-201.fc23.i686+PAE > >> Check the contents of /etc/dnf/dnf.conf. The parameter >> "installonly_limit" is usually 3 just to guarantee that you don't delete >> the running kernel. > > installonly_limit=3 > >> Did you do "dnf update --refresh" before you started system upgrade? > > Yes. > > > --Frank Elsner > Well then I would add "--allowerasing". -- Regards Jon Ingason -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from 23 to 24
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 12:16:03 +0200 Frank Elsner wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 05:57:57 -0400 (EDT) Jaroslav Mracek wrote: > > I have a question to your request: > > > > Do you have in /etc/dnf/dnf.conf following line: > > > > installonly_limit=3 > > Yes. > > > Did you made ``dnf upgrade --fresh`` before system-upgrade attempt? > > Yes > > > Do you run the newest kernel on your system? > > Yes > > > If some of the answers were no it could be a reason why you have the issue. > > > > If you will upgrade running kernel the replacement should take place during > > the reboot, therefore theoretically it should be save. > > Sounds good. Let me add: After "dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=24 --allowerasing" I still have the running kernel in /boot. Therefore it IS save. Thanks to all, Frank -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedora 23 bluetooth connection
On 07/27/2016 11:14 AM, Roger Wells wrote: > On 07/27/2016 08:16 AM, Ed Greshko wrote: >> >> >> On 07/26/16 23:56, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: >>> On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 09:35 -0400, Roger Wells wrote: On 07/25/2016 05:55 PM, Ed Greshko wrote: > > > On 07/26/16 02:49, Roger Wells wrote: >> Something changed (although not fatally): >> I use Bluetooth speakers quite often. >> Back in F22 or so after pairing the device merely turning it on caused >> Fedora to connect to it. >> Several months ago, now on F23, (not sure when this problem appeared) >> that changed and after turning the speaker on, I have to go into >> Bluetooth Settings where the device appears as "Disconnected", select it >> and activate the "Connection" switch several times and it will >> eventually connect and be available for selection in the "Sound >> Settings" after which it works fine. >> Is there a path back? >> >> The setup is up to date Fedora 23 using Gnome 3.18.1-1.fc23.x86_64 >> TIA, > I use F24, a Bluetooth headset, and KDE. The GUI may be different but I > think gnome > should have similar settings. > > On my settings for the headset I have "trusted" checked. Then there is > another "tab" > called "Advanced Settings". There is a drop down box for "Accept > Automatically" and I > have "Trusted Devices" selected. > > When I power on my headset it is connected automatically. > Thanks for responding. I don't see any Advanced Settings offer via the Gnome desktop and no mention of BT in the tweak tool. I'll hunt around. >>> To be clear: this was in KDE. I don't know what the equivalent Gnome >>> control is. >>> >> >> One thing that "confuses" me is that within the KDE settings there is, as I >> said, an >> "Accept Automatically" choice. But if you use bluetoothctl there doesn't >> appear to be an >> equivalent setting in the command line interface. >> >> I don't currently have GNOME installed on my system in order to check if my >> headset would >> connect automatically in that environment. >> > Here's progress: > Use bluetoothctl and set "trust" on for the speaker device. > After the next re-boot the device connected when powered on just like > before. (I just didn't know about the existence of bluetoothctl) > > Thanks, all > Well, not so good. It only did it once even though bluetoothctl still reports it as trusted. -- Roger Wells, P.E. leidos 221 Third St Newport, RI 02840 401-847-4210 (voice) 401-849-1585 (fax) roger.k.we...@leidos.com -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: Upgrading from 23 to 24
On 07/28/2016 06:01 AM, Frank Elsner wrote: After "dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=24 --allowerasing" I still have the running kernel in /boot. That's because the upgrade hasn't actually been run yet. All that does is download the packages to the hard drive. I'm a little concerned that the upgrade will actually fail because the running kernel during the upgrade process will be the one that is supposed to be erased. I wonder why there's a conflict between the kernel packages. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
systemd vs. autofs/nfs
systemd and autofs/nfs are at war and have been ever since systemd appeared. Specifically, if machine A has an open connection to machine B and B goes down or become inaccessible, then A cannot shutdown. A's shutdown sequence hangs, waiting for B to respond to an unmount command, which will not/cannot happen. WAITING WILL NOT HELP. Only a dirty disconnect will work; there's no way to avoid it. Here's what I've tried: - Precede 'shutdown' or 'reboot' or 'systemctl reboot' with umount -fl -t nfs (You might expect a forced lazy umount to do the job. It doesn't work; umount just hangs) - Change nfs mount option to 'soft' instead of 'hard'. Edit /etc/nfsmount.conf to say: Hard=False Soft=True (This did change the autofs/nfs mount option, but didn't improve the tolerance for a dirty disconnect. Shutdown still hangs.) - Reduce systemd's timeout values from 90 to 10 sec; edit /etc/systemd/system.conf to say: DefaultTimeoutStartSec=10s DefaultTimeoutStopSec=10s (During shutdown, systemd displays two times; the time it has waited for an unmount event, and the time limit to wait. Incomprehensibly, when the time limit is reached, it bumps it up and continues to wait. Changing the default timeout values seems to accelerate this recycling, but doesn't do anything for the actual time limit.) - Change the nfs timeout from 600 (default) to 20 decisec to reduce the time nfs waits for any response, including umount, before declaring a timeout. Edit /etc/nfsmount.conf to say: # Timeo=600 Timeo=20 (The option displayed by the mount command did change, but it did not help the shutdown hangup.) - That leaves ONLY TWO WAYS to shutdown machine A, both ugly: SysReq R E I S U B - which forces a reboot NOW Hold the Power button - which just stops everything. This is NOT NEW. Systemd has had this design defect from day one. SysV never hung on shutdown. It Just Knew when a dirty disconnect was the only viable way and handled it. How many more years must we wait? Have I overlooked something obvious? Is there a way to make systemd perform the simple function 'shutdown' smoothly, reliably and quickly? If anyone knows how, I would love to hear it. -- David A. De GraafDATIX, Inc.Hendersonville, NC d...@datix.us www.datix.us "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." -- Thomas Mann -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:37:41 -0400 David A. De Graaf wrote: > Have I overlooked something obvious? Is there a way to make systemd > perform the simple function 'shutdown' smoothly, reliably and quickly? > If anyone knows how, I would love to hear it. I can't make systemd itself work, but I've been using an outside systemd solution for a while now: I setup an alias for the "reboot" command that arranges to kill off all the things systemd unreasonably waits for, then does a real reboot. Since systemd now has nothing to stop it, it reboots rather fast (until something new shows up which I have to track down and add to my list :-). My current set of things to do before shutdown includes: umount -l -t nfs -a apachectl -k stop kill all the "user deamon" process trees. The user daemon stuff is handled by a program described here: http://tomhorsley.com/game/punch.html Of course, since (according to the systemd biggest myths page) systemd is easy to script and not at all confusing, then it should be trivial for me to script things so shutdown works this way automatically without me having to remember to run my alias in a terminal, but, alas, they don't appear to be myths at all. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
On 07/28/2016 11:53 AM, Tom Horsley wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:37:41 -0400 > David A. De Graaf wrote: > >> Have I overlooked something obvious? Is there a way to make systemd >> perform the simple function 'shutdown' smoothly, reliably and quickly? >> If anyone knows how, I would love to hear it. > > I can't make systemd itself work, but I've been using an > outside systemd solution for a while now: I setup > an alias for the "reboot" command that arranges to > kill off all the things systemd unreasonably waits > for, then does a real reboot. > > Since systemd now has nothing to stop it, it reboots > rather fast (until something new shows up which I have > to track down and add to my list :-). > > My current set of things to do before shutdown includes: > > umount -l -t nfs -a > apachectl -k stop > kill all the "user deamon" process trees. > > The user daemon stuff is handled by a program > described here: > > http://tomhorsley.com/game/punch.html > > Of course, since (according to the systemd biggest > myths page) systemd is easy to script and not at all > confusing, then it should be trivial for me to script > things so shutdown works this way automatically > without me having to remember to run my alias > in a terminal, but, alas, they don't appear to be > myths at all. I've said it before, systemd is a huge, cumbersome, useless solution looking for a problem. The decision to use this crud was one of the most boneheaded things any distribution (not just RHEL/Fedora) ever chose to adopt. Unfortunately, we're stuck with it now. As far as the NFS unmount issue, this was an interesting dialog that happened in September last year: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/1257 So, "but I doubt that lazy unmounting is really a comprehensive solution for anything..." comes from one of the developers. Fine, then when it times out, do a forced umount. This is pretty obvious. The server isn't listening and we (the client) are shutting down. Pull the g*ddamned plug! I'm with David...but this is only one of a litany of stupid decisions systemd makes. It seems that developers nowadays are never taught how (or are simply too lazy) to test for error conditions. -- - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com - - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 - -- - Political Correctness: The insane doctrine that postulates that it - - is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. - -- -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 02:53:34PM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:37:41 -0400 > David A. De Graaf wrote: > > > Have I overlooked something obvious? Is there a way to make systemd > > perform the simple function 'shutdown' smoothly, reliably and quickly? > > If anyone knows how, I would love to hear it. > > I can't make systemd itself work, but I've been using an > outside systemd solution for a while now: I setup > an alias for the "reboot" command that arranges to > kill off all the things systemd unreasonably waits > for, then does a real reboot. > > Since systemd now has nothing to stop it, it reboots > rather fast (until something new shows up which I have > to track down and add to my list :-). > > My current set of things to do before shutdown includes: > > umount -l -t nfs -a > apachectl -k stop > kill all the "user deamon" process trees. > > The user daemon stuff is handled by a program > described here: > > http://tomhorsley.com/game/punch.html > Thank you Tom Horsley for all your brilliant insights, and especially this one. I have taken your 'locate-user-daemons.c' program, lock, stock and barrel, stirred with some other condiments and come up with this alternate /usr/local/bin/reboot script that works for me: $ cat /usr/local/bin/reboot # Precede normal reboot command with unmounting of nfs mounts # and stop other impediments to progress /usr/local/bin/nfsumount /usr/bin/pkill -9 gkrellmd /usr/local/bin/locate-user-daemons | /bin/bash -i systemctl reboot where /usr/local/bin/nfsumount contains: # Forcibly umount all autofs-mounted filesystems mount | grep /net/ | sed -e 's/.*on //' | sed -e 's/ .*//' | sort -u | tac | while read fn; do umount -fl -t nfs $fn & done Your simpler 'umount -l -t nfs -a' works for mounts listed in /etc/fstab, but not for autofs-mounted filesystems, I believe. I (re)discovered that gkrellmd takes a full 90 sec to be stopped by systemd, but no time at all by pkill; I added that. As you say, more may turn up. Now the 'reboot' command makes my systems shut down smoothly, reliably and quickly, as proper Linux systems should. -- David A. De GraafDATIX, Inc.Hendersonville, NC d...@datix.us www.datix.us "Those who hear not the music, think the dancers mad." -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
Hey guys... Not to start a flame war... But I've looked at different linux flavors.. ubuntu/mint/centos/etc.. and I'm thinking of taking the step to centos 7/fed24(or whatever it is...) But, the whole systemd/dnf stuff... is that really useful, as opposed to the philosophy of some of the other flavors? On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Rick Stevens wrote: > On 07/28/2016 11:53 AM, Tom Horsley wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:37:41 -0400 > > David A. De Graaf wrote: > > > >> Have I overlooked something obvious? Is there a way to make systemd > >> perform the simple function 'shutdown' smoothly, reliably and quickly? > >> If anyone knows how, I would love to hear it. > > > > I can't make systemd itself work, but I've been using an > > outside systemd solution for a while now: I setup > > an alias for the "reboot" command that arranges to > > kill off all the things systemd unreasonably waits > > for, then does a real reboot. > > > > Since systemd now has nothing to stop it, it reboots > > rather fast (until something new shows up which I have > > to track down and add to my list :-). > > > > My current set of things to do before shutdown includes: > > > > umount -l -t nfs -a > > apachectl -k stop > > kill all the "user deamon" process trees. > > > > The user daemon stuff is handled by a program > > described here: > > > > http://tomhorsley.com/game/punch.html > > > > Of course, since (according to the systemd biggest > > myths page) systemd is easy to script and not at all > > confusing, then it should be trivial for me to script > > things so shutdown works this way automatically > > without me having to remember to run my alias > > in a terminal, but, alas, they don't appear to be > > myths at all. > > I've said it before, systemd is a huge, cumbersome, useless solution > looking for a problem. The decision to use this crud was one of the most > boneheaded things any distribution (not just RHEL/Fedora) ever chose > to adopt. Unfortunately, we're stuck with it now. > > As far as the NFS unmount issue, this was an interesting dialog > that happened in September last year: > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/1257 > > So, "but I doubt that lazy unmounting is really a comprehensive > solution for anything..." comes from one of the developers. Fine, then > when it times out, do a forced umount. This is pretty obvious. The > server isn't listening and we (the client) are shutting down. Pull the > g*ddamned plug! > > I'm with David...but this is only one of a litany of stupid decisions > systemd makes. It seems that developers nowadays are never taught how > (or are simply too lazy) to test for error conditions. > -- > - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com - > - AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 226437340 Yahoo: origrps2 - > -- > - Political Correctness: The insane doctrine that postulates that it - > - is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end. - > -- > -- > users mailing list > users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org > -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
Hey David.. Thanks for the thoughts on this... Would you mind posting/pasting what your code/shell scripts are/is.. I'm sure someone will need something similar in life! -Peace! On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 5:26 PM, David A. De Graaf wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 02:53:34PM -0400, Tom Horsley wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:37:41 -0400 > > David A. De Graaf wrote: > > > > > Have I overlooked something obvious? Is there a way to make systemd > > > perform the simple function 'shutdown' smoothly, reliably and quickly? > > > If anyone knows how, I would love to hear it. > > > > I can't make systemd itself work, but I've been using an > > outside systemd solution for a while now: I setup > > an alias for the "reboot" command that arranges to > > kill off all the things systemd unreasonably waits > > for, then does a real reboot. > > > > Since systemd now has nothing to stop it, it reboots > > rather fast (until something new shows up which I have > > to track down and add to my list :-). > > > > My current set of things to do before shutdown includes: > > > > umount -l -t nfs -a > > apachectl -k stop > > kill all the "user deamon" process trees. > > > > The user daemon stuff is handled by a program > > described here: > > > > http://tomhorsley.com/game/punch.html > > > > Thank you Tom Horsley for all your brilliant insights, > and especially this one. > > I have taken your 'locate-user-daemons.c' program, lock, stock > and barrel, stirred with some other condiments and come up with > this alternate /usr/local/bin/reboot script that works for me: > > $ cat /usr/local/bin/reboot > # Precede normal reboot command with unmounting of nfs mounts > # and stop other impediments to progress > /usr/local/bin/nfsumount > /usr/bin/pkill -9 gkrellmd > /usr/local/bin/locate-user-daemons | /bin/bash -i > systemctl reboot > > where /usr/local/bin/nfsumount contains: > # Forcibly umount all autofs-mounted filesystems > mount | grep /net/ | > sed -e 's/.*on //' | sed -e 's/ .*//' | > sort -u | tac | > while read fn; do > umount -fl -t nfs $fn & > done > > Your simpler 'umount -l -t nfs -a' works for mounts listed > in /etc/fstab, but not for autofs-mounted filesystems, I believe. > > I (re)discovered that gkrellmd takes a full 90 sec to be stopped > by systemd, but no time at all by pkill; I added that. > As you say, more may turn up. > > Now the 'reboot' command makes my systems shut down smoothly, reliably > and quickly, as proper Linux systems should. > > -- > David A. De GraafDATIX, Inc.Hendersonville, NC > d...@datix.us www.datix.us > > > "Those who hear not the music, think the dancers mad." > -- > users mailing list > users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org > -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 18:43:09 -0400 bruce wrote: > But, the whole systemd/dnf stuff... is that really useful, as opposed to > the philosophy of some of the other flavors? There is no other flavor. Systemd will assimilate you. Every distro uses it now (as near as I can tell). DNF is totally separate (so far, though you never know what new piece of linux systemd will engulf). The debian/ubuntu flavors use .deb files rather than .rpm files and have tools that do much the same jobs, but are slightly different than the .rpm/yum/dnf world. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
Hey Tom! So.. If I undertand the overall point. Most linux flavors are more or less moving in the same direction.. Just some a bit faster than others.. Heaven or Hell!! Thanks On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Tom Horsley wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 18:43:09 -0400 > bruce wrote: > > > But, the whole systemd/dnf stuff... is that really useful, as opposed to > > the philosophy of some of the other flavors? > > There is no other flavor. Systemd will assimilate you. Every > distro uses it now (as near as I can tell). DNF is totally separate > (so far, though you never know what new piece of linux systemd > will engulf). > > The debian/ubuntu flavors use .deb files rather than .rpm files > and have tools that do much the same jobs, but are slightly > different than the .rpm/yum/dnf world. > -- > users mailing list > users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe or change subscription options: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct > Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org > -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
How to turn off the touchpad?
I used to do it in All Settings/Mouse and Touchpad applet. It doesn't appear to be there any more. How do I tell Fedora to not use the touchpad? TC -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
David A. De Graaf wrote: > systemd and autofs/nfs are at war and have been ever since systemd > appeared. > > Specifically, if machine A has an open connection to machine B > and B goes down or become inaccessible, then A cannot shutdown. > A's shutdown sequence hangs, waiting for B to respond to an unmount > command, which will not/cannot happen. Like this bug? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359423 -- Rex -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: How to turn off the touchpad?
On 07/28/2016 04:15 PM, thomas cameron wrote: I used to do it in All Settings/Mouse and Touchpad applet. It doesn't appear to be there any more. What DE are you using? It's still here in Xfce. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: How to turn off the touchpad?
On 29/07/16 11:15, thomas cameron wrote: I used to do it in All Settings/Mouse and Touchpad applet. It doesn't appear to be there any more. How do I tell Fedora to not use the touchpad? I asked a similar question on this list, long ago, and was advised that from the command line you can do synclient TouchpadOff=1 and that worked for me. (Use "=0" to switch it back on again.) I created my own panel icon to effect these commands via point and click. Note that I am using an antediluvian release of Fedora (and an equally old Mint desktop) so what I say above may be, uh, off the beam. HTH, but. cheers, Rolf Turner -- Technical Editor ANZJS Department of Statistics University of Auckland Phone: +64-9-373-7599 ext. 88276 -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: How to turn off the touchpad?
On 07/28/2016 06:38 PM, Joe Zeff wrote: > On 07/28/2016 04:15 PM, thomas cameron wrote: >> I used to do it in All Settings/Mouse and Touchpad applet. It doesn't >> appear to be there any more. > > What DE are you using? It's still here in Xfce. Sorry, my bad. Gnome3. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: How to turn off the touchpad?
On 07/28/2016 06:40 PM, Rolf Turner wrote: > On 29/07/16 11:15, thomas cameron wrote: >> I used to do it in All Settings/Mouse and Touchpad applet. It doesn't >> appear to be there any more. >> >> How do I tell Fedora to not use the touchpad? > > I asked a similar question on this list, long ago, and was advised that > from the command line you can do > > synclient TouchpadOff=1 > > and that worked for me. (Use "=0" to switch it back on again.) > > I created my own panel icon to effect these commands via point and click. > > Note that I am using an antediluvian release of Fedora (and an equally > old Mint desktop) so what I say above may be, uh, off the beam. Thanks very much! TC -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: How to turn off the touchpad?
On 07/29/16 07:40, Rolf Turner wrote: > On 29/07/16 11:15, thomas cameron wrote: >> I used to do it in All Settings/Mouse and Touchpad applet. It doesn't >> appear to be there any more. >> >> How do I tell Fedora to not use the touchpad? > > I asked a similar question on this list, long ago, and was advised that from > the command > line you can do > > synclient TouchpadOff=1 > > and that worked for me. (Use "=0" to switch it back on again.) > > I created my own panel icon to effect these commands via point and click. > > Note that I am using an antediluvian release of Fedora (and an equally old > Mint desktop) > so what I say above may be, uh, off the beam. > > HTH, but. > FWIW, my Acer Laptop reports "Couldn't find synaptics properties. No synaptics driver loaded?" when using "synclient -l". Yet my touchpad works just fine. KDE has a setting for disabling the touchpad, but it doesn't work. Lucky for me my laptop has a "Fn+F7" key combination which turns off the touchpad hardware wise. -- You're Welcome Zachary Quinto -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedora 23 bluetooth connection
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:33:00AM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:57:24PM +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 05:55 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > > > > > > On 07/26/16 02:49, Roger Wells wrote: > > > > > > > > Something changed (although not fatally): > > > > I use Bluetooth speakers quite often. > > > > Back in F22 or so after pairing the device merely turning it on caused > > > > Fedora to connect to it. > > > > Several months ago, now on F23, (not sure when this problem appeared) > > > > that changed and after turning the speaker on, I have to go into > > > > Bluetooth Settings where the device appears as "Disconnected", select it > > > > and activate the "Connection" switch several times and it will > > > > eventually connect and be available for selection in the "Sound > > > > Settings" after which it works fine. > > > > Is there a path back? > > > > > > > > The setup is up to date Fedora 23 using Gnome 3.18.1-1.fc23.x86_64 > > > > TIA, > > > > > > I use F24, a Bluetooth headset, and KDE. The GUI may be different but I > > > think gnome > > > should have similar settings. > > > > > > On my settings for the headset I have "trusted" checked. Then there is > > > another "tab" > > > called "Advanced Settings". There is a drop down box for "Accept > > > Automatically" and I > > > have "Trusted Devices" selected. > > > > > > When I power on my headset it is connected automatically. > > > > Interesting. A recent thread (around July 8) concerned similar problems > > with BT mice. I wonder if this is the solution. I confess I'd never > > looked at the Advanced Settings when trying to solve this. > > > I was the OP on that thread. I saw the trusted setting and am fairly > sure I tried it with no improvement. > > I stopped using the bt mouse. Even turned off bt in the bios. > Will revisit the issue with the trusted setting and report back > It seems "trust" is the key. I had difficulty turning it on for my mouse device. In blueman-manager, there are menu items and a separate icon button to turn on trust. These did not complain but didn't set the mouse as a trusted device either. I went into bluetoothctl, found the device id, and used the trust command. It reported setting "trust succeeded". Sure enough, when I went back into the gui blueman-manager, it was showing the trust icon for my mouse. Now rebooting with the mouse on, or starting the mouse after booting, it comes right up. Seems like blueman-manager needs a fix to get trust working. Jon -- Jon H. LaBadie jo...@jgcomp.com -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: bluetooth mouse [SOLVED]
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 12:43:07AM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote:
> I have an old Dell Vostro 1500 laptop. It was running
> Fedora 17 with no problems with the bluetooth mouse I use.
>
> After a fresh install of Fedora 24 Workstation I can't
> get the mouse to reconnect after a boot. Systemctl
> reports bluetoothd 'Failed to obtain handles for
> "Serviced Changed" characteristic'. Both blueman-manager
> and blueman-applet report the adapter is off and are
> unable to turn it on.
>
> I can go into bluetoothctl, power on the adapter and
> connect to the mouse. Things are fine until a reboot.
>
> lshw reports the bluetooth adapter is a Broadcom BCM2045.
>
> Any thoughts on how to get the adapter powered on at boot
> and the mouse auto-reconnected as it nicely did 7 Fedora
> releases ago.
>
> Thanks, Jon
In another thread ("fedora 23 bluetooth connection") the
"Trusted" setting for a BT device was mentioned.
Previously I had tried to set my mouse as a trusted device
using the GUI configuration tool "blueman-manager". When
I clicked on the "trust" icon or on the "trust" menu icon,
nothing seemed to happen but no error messages came up either.
I revisited the problem and repeated the above observation.
Then I tried the "bluetoothctl" command, finding "trust"
and "untrust" commands were available. I ran the "trust [dev]"
command, it reported "trust successfully applied to [dev]".
And over in the blueman-manager, a trust icon appeared on the
mouse entry.
Even better news, when I reboot, if the mouse is on it is
connected and active. If the mouse is not on, turning it
on automaticall connects it and it is active.
Sounds like there is a problem with blueman-manager!
Jon
--
Jon H. LaBadie jo...@jgcomp.com
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: fedora 23 bluetooth connection
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:33:00AM -0400, Jon LaBadie wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:57:24PM +0100, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-07-26 at 05:55 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > > > > > > On 07/26/16 02:49, Roger Wells wrote: > > > > > > > > Something changed (although not fatally): > > > > I use Bluetooth speakers quite often. > > > > Back in F22 or so after pairing the device merely turning it on caused > > > > Fedora to connect to it. > > > > Several months ago, now on F23, (not sure when this problem appeared) > > > > that changed and after turning the speaker on, I have to go into > > > > Bluetooth Settings where the device appears as "Disconnected", select it > > > > and activate the "Connection" switch several times and it will > > > > eventually connect and be available for selection in the "Sound > > > > Settings" after which it works fine. > > > > Is there a path back? > > > > > > > > The setup is up to date Fedora 23 using Gnome 3.18.1-1.fc23.x86_64 > > > > TIA, > > > > > > I use F24, a Bluetooth headset, and KDE. The GUI may be different but I > > > think gnome > > > should have similar settings. > > > > > > On my settings for the headset I have "trusted" checked. Then there is > > > another "tab" > > > called "Advanced Settings". There is a drop down box for "Accept > > > Automatically" and I > > > have "Trusted Devices" selected. > > > > > > When I power on my headset it is connected automatically. > > > > Interesting. A recent thread (around July 8) concerned similar problems > > with BT mice. I wonder if this is the solution. I confess I'd never > > looked at the Advanced Settings when trying to solve this. > > > I was the OP on that thread. I saw the trusted setting and am fairly > sure I tried it with no improvement. > > I stopped using the bt mouse. Even turned off bt in the bios. > Will revisit the issue with the trusted setting and report back See my posting today "RE bluetooth mouse [SOLVED]" for a fuller description. In short, I had tried to set the mouse to a trusted device using blueman commands such as blueman-manager. I tried again but it did not allow automatic connection of the mouse. Now I tried the "trust" sub-command of bluetoothctl. It did succeed in setting the mouse as a trusted device. And the mouse automatically connects after boot. Jon -- Jon H. LaBadie jo...@jgcomp.com -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
[Note:] ssh agent forwarding
Hi all, There was a thread on here recently about ssh agent forwarding. Usually I start it like this: ssh-agent ssh-add I came across a situation where I couldn't establish a connection to the agent when I tried to "ssh-add" my keys. ssh-agent had been executed already. It had somehow become discombobulated. The solution was to invoke ssh-agent differently: eval `ssh-agent -s` ssh-add Hope that saves somebody else some headaches ;D Mike Wright -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: [Note:] ssh agent forwarding
On 07/28/2016 06:34 PM, Mike Wright wrote: Usually I start it like this: ssh-agent The solution was to invoke ssh-agent differently: eval `ssh-agent -s` Yes, that's normal. You need to either eval the output of ssh-agent or it must be the parent process of your shell. (e.g. ssh-agent gnome-shell). If you weren't doing that in the past, then the ssh-agent you invoked without "eval" wasn't the ssh-agent you were actually using. GNOME provides its own agent, for instance, and you may have been using that. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: [Note:] ssh agent forwarding
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 10:24 PM Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 07/28/2016 06:34 PM, Mike Wright wrote: > > Usually I start it like this: > > ssh-agent > > The solution was to invoke ssh-agent differently: > > eval `ssh-agent -s` > > Yes, that's normal. You need to either eval the output of ssh-agent or > it must be the parent process of your shell. (e.g. ssh-agent > gnome-shell). If you weren't doing that in the past, then the ssh-agent > you invoked without "eval" wasn't the ssh-agent you were actually > using. GNOME provides its own agent, for instance, and you may have > been using that. > > Agreed. Mike was almost certainly connecting to the one provided by gnome-keyring-daemon (/run/user//keyring/ssh), and the ssh-agent he was launching wasn't being used at all. As was pointed out in the previous thread, it seems there might be a race condition, and sometimes this socket doesn't get created by gnome-keyring-daemon when one logs in. This has only happened to me in F24, and it has happened a few times since I've upgraded. So far, I've found that simply logging out and logging back in is usually sufficient to fix it. It is annoying, though, especially since I don't see any errors from monkeysphere when it tries to inject my auth keys into the agent and the agent isn't there. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
Re: systemd vs. autofs/nfs
On 16/07/28 18:52, Tom Horsley wrote: On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 18:43:09 -0400 bruce wrote: But, the whole systemd/dnf stuff... is that really useful, as opposed to the philosophy of some of the other flavors? There is no other flavor. Systemd will assimilate you. Every distro uses it now (as near as I can tell). DNF is totally separate (so far, though you never know what new piece of linux systemd will engulf). Iirc Gentoo doesn't use it, Devuan (a Debian-fork that got forked to not use systemd) doesn't use it and will never use it, there is Manjaro OpenRC and Arch OpenRC, also Obarun and Slackware and some others. Have a look here: http://systemd-free.org/ Also: if the init-system is really important to you, have a look at *BSD (PC-BSD is quite desktop-friendly). Depending on your needs it might work well for you. Niels -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
